State v. Neighbors
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Wayne Circuit Court. — How. J. L. Fort, Judge. (1) The prosecutrix is corroborated completely by the testimony of witness Jines, who said he overheard the entire transaction between defendant and the girl on the night in question. This evidence is sufficient to convict. (2) It is not essential that the record show the presence of defendant at each hour of the day.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Wayne Circuit Court. — How. J. L. Fort, Judge. (1) The prosecutrix is corroborated completely by the testimony of witness Jines, who said he overheard the entire transaction between defendant and the girl on the night in question. This evidence is sufficient to convict. (2) It is not essential that the record show the presence of defendant at each hour of the day. If it shows his presence at the beginning of the day, it will be presumed that he was present during the entire day. State v. Lewis, 69 Mo. 92; State v. Yerger, 86 Mo. 33; Sec. 2610, R. S. 1899.
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
— Defendant was convicted in the circuit court of Wayne county, and his punishment fixed at two years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary, under an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of said county, charging him with defiling one Maude Crandall, a female under the age of eighteen years, to-wit, of the age of twelve years, who was confided to his care and protection. He appeals.
The defendant conducted a small country store at Chaonia, Wayne county. The prosecuting witness, Maude Crandall, is an orphan, her mother and father having died in 1893 and 1899, respectively. She was born in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. YergerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- State v. LewisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
3Cited by2 opinions
- City of St. Louis v. G. H. Wright Contracting Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- State v. LongSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908